Search

This article focuses on the court ruling given in Beverly Cocktail Lounge Inc. v. Emerald Vending Machine Inc. case. Commencement of or service of notice of intention to arbitrate is no longer a special proceeding in New York and thus a party moving to stay arbitration cannot have an extension of time by relying upon Sec. 2103 CPLR permitting addition of three days where service of papers is made upon an attorney in a pending action. The court stated: "This provision was intended to change the prior law so that the arbitration would not take on the character of a judicial proceeding until the first application arising out of it is made to the court." In this case no such application was made; the other party merely served a notice of intention to arbitrate.

Shaken by sexual harassment charges and costly lawsuits, Wall Street in the late 1990s saw a real shift away from its "old boy network" past -- at least on paper anyway. In response to sexual harassment suits, many firms on Wall Street implemented strict sexual harassment policies, and even family friendly work-life balance policies. Unfortunately, the lawsuits have continued, prompting many to wonder why Wall Street continues to be so hostile to anyone other than white males. In a research study conducted in 1998 and 1999 with 76 men and women working on Wall Street, I found a number of reasons why change has been so slow in the making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An administrative law is effectively non-existent in the eyes of the regulated if adherence to it, and non-compliance with it, yield the same outcome. For an administrative law to be most valuable, the government must take enforcement action against the non-compliant. If enforcement action is not taken, the law at hand is stripped of its meaning and power, rendered mere words on paper lacking substance, importance, and pursuance. Statutes that are not enforced, whether a result of poor legal grounding or the lack of enumerated recourse, are farces. An administrative statute is only as strong as the enforcement system utilized to uphold it. This reality becomes apparent when examining the New York City Landmarks Law, which gives the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) the power to protect and regulate local historic resources deemed significant. Signed by Mayor Robert Wagner in April of 1965, the Landmarks Law was the product of a growing concern for threatened historic architecture and a simultaneous awareness and appreciation of cultural heritage in New York City and nationwide. This article will examine the evolution of enforcement of the Landmarks Law from its signing to date, exemplifying the importance of litigation and a proactive enforcement philosophy to its successful administration. Following this examination, this article will present an explanation of the system as it currently functions, as well as options for its future enhancement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on New York City's (NYC) proposed plastic bag reduction ordinance as a model ordinance for cities in the U.S. Topics discussed include lawsuits filed by plastics industry groups based on environmental claims or adoption of plastic bag ban in California and New York State, the environmental and economic harms caused by plastic bags and charges on carryout bags that reduces carryout bag use. It also discusses the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The article reports on the lawsuit filed by James Sweeney and Kathleen Ligus against the Winnacunnet Cooperative School District in Hampton, New York for the nuisance it caused during late nights and early morning. The lawsuit asked the Rockingham County Superior Court to order the school district and its administrative unit to stop construction work and emptying of trash bins during late night and early morning hours. Plaintiffs said they have lost substantial amount of sleep due to noises.

The article examines the default judgment statute. It discusses the requirement that a plaintiff submit proof of the facts of its claim, including proof of service of the initiatory papers on the defendant, proof of the default and proof of the facts constituting the claim. Furthermore, the article also evaluates the case law regarding the consequences of a plaintiff's failure to submit sufficient proof of its claim.

This article discusses the use of handwriting identification in proving the innocence of Christopher Emanuel Ballestrero, who was accused of armed robbery of the Prudential Insurance Co. of America in New York City on July 9, 1952. Former State Senator Frank D. O'Connor was retained as defense counsel of Ballestrero. One of his first steps to verify his client's claim of innocence was to retain the services of a handwriting identification expert. In lettering the robbery note the hold-up man had misspelled the last word, drawer, writing it as draw. For some unknown reason Ballestrero left off the er of the same word in one of the six samples he prepared. One of the basic premises of handwriting identification is that two specimens of handwriting or handlettering must have been prepared by different writers if they contain a series of repeated differences. Ballestrero forms a G by two separate strokes. He takes the pen from the paper at the end of the C portion and then writes separately an inverted L to form the horizontal bar and downstroke. In contrast, the three G's in the robbery note are written continuously. The relative or proportional size of characters plays an important role in identifying handprinting.

Highlights the temporary restraining order extended by the New York Supreme Court with jurisdiction over $277 million in bonds purchased by American investors in Asia Pulp and Paper (AAP) and its affiliate. Temporary ban on APP and its affiliates from seeking any relief in a lawsuit in Indonesia; Amount of funds owed by APP and its affiliates from various public and private investors.

The role of the Attorney General in New York State has become increasingly active, shifting from mostly defensive representation of New York to also encompass affirmative litigation on behalf of the state and its citizens. As newly-active state Attorneys General across the country begin to play a larger role in national politics and policymaking, the scope of the powers of the Attorney General in New York State has never been more important. This Article traces the constitutional and historical development of the Attorney General in New York State, arguing that the office retains a significant body of common law powers, many of which are underutilized. The Article concludes with a discussion of how these powers might influence the actions of the Attorney General in New York State in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In its recent Ellis and Hudson decisions, the Supreme Court imposed new substantive restrictions and procedural requirements on states that authorize, and public employee unions that utilize, agency shop fees. Focusing on New York State, this study analyzes the consequences for the collection and expenditure of agency fees of the Supreme Court's new emphasis on the First Amendment basis for dissenting employees' rights. The author finds that Ellis and Hudson cast doubt on the constitutionality of some current agency fee practices. He concludes that New York's Public Employment Relations Board will have to take a more active role in policing agency fee standards and procedures than it has until now if the agency fee in New York is to withstand First Amendment scrutiny. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the legal aspects of early 19th century New York City, New York resident Sarah Allingham's stolen sheet and the historiography of antebellum U.S. legal history. An overview of women's legal rights in the antebellum period, including in regard to Allingham's lawsuit against working class women she accused of stealing her sheet, is provided.

New York closing-statement data provide unique insight into settlement and selection. The distributions of settlements and adjudicated damages are remarkably similar, and the average settlement is very close to the average judgment. One interpretation is that selection effectsmay be small or nonexistent. Because existing litigationmodels all predict selection bias, we develop a simple, no-selection-bias model that is consistent with the data. Nevertheless, we show that the data can also be explained by generalized versions of screening, signaling, and Priest-- Klein models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides information on the ruling of New York State Appellate Court related to construction contracts. Where construction contract provided for arbitration according to the "provisions then obtaining of the standard form of arbitration procedure of the AlA," the court ordered arbitration to be administered by the American Arbitration Association, notwithstanding absence of language in provision referring arbitration to that body. The court also held that the service of notice of intention to arbitration by mail upon the respondents' attorneys was sufficient where the attorneys admittedly received the papers and no claim was made that there was no actual notice.

This article presents information on a court decision in the case Long Island Insurance Co. v. Maldonado, in New York. The court held that notice of petition must be served in the same manner as summons or by registered or certified mail. Further, such notice must be served upon the party over whom jurisdiction is sought and not upon his attorney. In affirming the lower court's refusal of petitioner's application, the court found that petitioner-insurer, who sought to stay an arbitration demanded by insured under an uninsured motorist endorsement, failed to acquire jurisdiction by serving its motion papers by regular mail upon the insured's attorneys.

A recent federal district court decision found that the New York City Police Department engaged in unconstitutional policing. Officers stopped millions of minority young men over the span of several years. Most of those stopped were innocent of any wrongdoing. This article uses qualitative and quantitative research methods to investigate these inequities, examining the views of both the police and those who were stopped. The authors find that pressure on officers emanating from headquarters was responsible for much of the illegal behavior by lower-level officers. Additionally, youth in minority neighborhoods felt mistreated by the police; this led to distrust in the police. The authors suggest solutions to ameliorate this painful episode in police practice. The article concludes with specific recommendations such as reducing management pressure on officers and police developing community partnerships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses fairness and equality in relation to the use of a sharing-related rotation (taking turns) method for distributing the disputed property in a U.S. decedent's estate as of 2015, and it mentions the 1973 New York case In re Estate of McDowell which deals with two siblings and a dispute over the possession of a chair. Distributive justice is examined, along with several forms of rotations such as single-object and multiple-object rotations.

The article discusses the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Third Department's ruling in the 2014 case People v. Atkinson which deals with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and claims of excessive force by police officers. Deprivations of American constitutional rights are addressed, along with the suppression of evidence and defendant Karseen Atkinson's arrest during a traffic stop. Civil rights violations and Title 42, Section 1983 of the U.S. Code are examined.

The article discusses the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department's ruling in the 2014 case In re New York v. Raul L. which deals with the legal aspects of a searching inquiry requirement in civil commitment proceedings involving sex offenders. New York's Sex Offenders Management and Treatment Act (SOMTA) is addressed, along with the state's Mental Hygiene Law and defendant Raul L.'s waiver of his statutory right to counsel.

The article discusses the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department's ruling in the 2014 case People v. Theodore which deals with unreasonable searches and seizures under the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment, the legal aspects of the curtilage (land) surrounding a home, and the efforts to suppress physical evidence of marijuana. A U.S. open fields evidentiary doctrine is examined, along with the New York Constitution and the legal rights of defendant Rashid Theodore.

The article discusses the Court of Appeals of New York's ruling in the 2013 case Cunningham v. New York State Department of Labor which deals with workplace-related legal exceptions and loopholes regarding the Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking of government employees' personal vehicles without a search warrant. The legal rights of public employees in New York are examined, along with a right to privacy in the state and the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The article discusses the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, First Department's ruling in the 2014 case Matter of Jamal S. which deals with the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment, a right to privacy in New York, and the legal aspects of unreasonable searches and seizures involving minors. The protection of an individual's dignity is mentioned, along with the New York Constitution, unlawful arrests in New York, and temporary detentions of persons.

The article presents practical advice regarding how plaintiffs in the U.S. may establish premises liability in lawsuits which deal with accidents caused by invisible and unseen ice (black ice). Legal liability is mentioned, along with the legal aspects of dangerous conditions that are not visible or apparent to property owners in places such as New York. Common law distinctions involving trespassers, licensees, and invitees are examined, along with a constructive notice doctrine.

The article discusses the court case People v. Smith filed in the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division regarding right of individuals to be free from government unreasonable searches and seizures. Topics discussed include protection of defendant from searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment, conviction of defendant Ryan Smith in the third degree robbery and forceful collection of Smith's DNA sample by the police officers.

The article discusses the court case People v. McFarlane filed in the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division regarding execution of search by warrant and supported by probable cause. Topics discussed include consent given by the defendant to search a locked glove compartment in his motor vehicle, suppression of evidence by defense counsel and lawful request by police officer for the search operation.

The article offers information on the judicial decision of the First Department of the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court in the case of Rodriguez v. City of New York, in which the Court determines whether an inmate could recover damages after a slip and fall on flooded hallways regarding violation of the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Topics discussed include the U.S. Bill of Rights, due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and Farmer v. Brennan cases.

The article offers information on the judicial decision of the New York Court of Appeals in the case of People v. Duhs, in which the Court rejected the plaintiff's argument for testifying about a statement of witness under the hearsay rule. It informs that defendant Michael Duhs claimed that the admission of the pediatrician's testimony regarding the child's statement violated his constitutional right to confrontation under the Sixth Amendment in context to decision in Crawford v. Washington.

The article offers information on the Court of Appeals of the New York State in the case People v. Rabb, in which the Court affirmed the judgments against defendants Reginald Rabb and Steven Mason for their conviction of grand larceny and corruption against construction companies. It analyzes the whether the Court should have borrowed from the New York Criminal Procedure Law (CPL) 700 while following electronic eavesdropping procedures.

The article offers information on the judicial decision of the Supreme Court of Bronx County, New York, in the case of People v. Keita, in which the Court charged the defendant Ibrahim Keita for criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, stolen property and grand larceny in the third degree. It distinguishes between the federal analysis and the New York State analysis of violation of the Fourth Amendment's right and Miranda warnings based on defendant's allegations .

The article offers information on the judicial decision of New York Supreme Court in the case of People v. Pinckney, in which the Court interpreted the exclusionary rule and inevitable discovery doctrine to address the defendant Jeffrey Pinckney's motions to suppress evidence under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It informs that Pinckney allegated New York City Police Officer Joel Gomez's for unlawful searches and seizures regarding illegal possession of marijuana.

The article offers information on the judicial decision of the Second Department of the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court in the case People v. Howard, in which the Court denied the defendant Dustin Howard's motion to suppress the evidence in context to violation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It informs that the defendant made allegations for unreasonable searches and seizures of his gun violating his legitimate expectation of privacy.

The article presents information on the Stranger Originated Life Insurance (STOLI) transactions with reference to the trial of Kramer v. Phoenix Life Insurance Co. It discusses the insurance law of New York based on selling of life insurance policies to strangers. It further focuses on the origin of STOLI and the decisions of the New York Court of Appeals. It also discusses the need of precise regulations for protecting legitimate life settlements.

The article focuses on Myriad Genetics Inc., a molecular diagnostics company and the sole provider of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes diagnostic test. It states that due to high cost of the test and inability to offer the test, Myriad Genetics faced several trails in New York. It further states that claims included mutations in isolated BRCA1/2 genes and screening of potential cancer therapeutics. It also discusses the adoption of fair use doctrine that exempts scientists from patent infringement.

The article discusses a court case wherein the defendant, Marc Bordeau, brought a pretrial motion to dismiss the indictment against him, and suppress all evidence during a traffic stop in Essex County, New York. It mentions that Bordeau had sought dismissal for the alleged traffic infraction after the police required him to stop. It states that the Essex County Court had granted his motion, stating that his three-second encroachment of the boundary line was not a traffic infraction.

The article discusses the court case People v. Duran, wherein Claudia Duran was charged with 26 counts of aggravated harassment for allegedly sending obscene text messages to her friend. It mentions that Duran filed a motion to dismiss the charges because they violated her right to free speech under the U.S. and New York Constitutions. However, the Criminal Court of the City of New York had denied her motion, stating the court was not prosecuting her for her speech but her harassing conduct.

We examine the market's reaction to New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's civil suit against mega-broker Marsh for bid rigging and inappropriate use of contingent commissions within a generalized autoregressive conditionally heteroskedastic (GARCH) framework. Effects on the stock returns of insurance brokers and insurers are tested. The findings are: (1) GARCH effects are significant in modeling broker/insurer returns; (2) the suit generated negative effects on the brokerage industry and individual brokers, suggesting that contagion dominates competitive effects; (3) spillover effects from the brokerage sector to insurance business are significant and mostly negative, demonstrating industry integration; and (4) information-based contagion is supported, as opposed to the pure-panic contagion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers the author's insight on her experience leading a group of social workers and social scientists hired to resolve the Fire Department of New York City's (FDNY) employment issues. She says that in a case filed against FDNY, federal Judge Nicholas Garaufis, in July 2009, found FDNY guilty for racial discrimination of its applicants. The author says that her experience taught her the value of advocacy, government policy, and social legislation.

The article examines the Civil Practice Law Rules (CPLR) 3408 as it concerns foreclosure actions filed in New York. It says that the language of the statute offers minor procedural flaws that are rectifiable by judges. It mentions that CPLR 3408 was enforced to nurture the early settlement of foreclosure actions in order to preserve home ownership and to extenuate the subprime credit crisis. The statute specifies three types of applicable mortgages, namely the "subprime" loan, the "nontraditional home loan," and the "high-cost home loan." It discusses various state cases, which include Butler Capital Corp. v. Cannistra, Indymac Federal Bank FSB v. Black, and Accredited Home Lenders Inc. v. Hughes.

Environmental controversies are often framed as conflicts between environmentalist and antienviron-mentalist positions. The underlying dimensions of ethics and justice tend to be overlooked. This article seeks to integrate insights from environmental ethics and sociological observations through a case study of a watershed conflict. A controversy emerged in the 1990s when residents of the New York City (NYC) watershed filed a lawsuit to block NYC's proposed regulations for the land surrounding the streams and reservoirs that supply NYC's drinking water. The conflict was resolved after NYC agreed to provide economic development funds to the watershed towns in exchange for accepting the regulations. An analysis of interviews with NYC watershed town supervisors reveals that the conflict was resolved because underlying competing theories of justice were addressed. This contradicts the popular narrative that an environmental conflict can be resolved when competing parties come to the realization that natural ecosystems provide valuable water-purification services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents information related to international arbitration in New York. New York Governor George Pataki signed a legislation on October 4, 2005, that granted state courts to order provisional remedies in international arbitration cases. The legislative action by Pataki changes a 1982 judicial interpretation of Section 7502(c) of the New York Civil Practice Law in "Cooper v. Ateliers de la Motobecane," which restricted the use of provision remedies to only domestic cases. The reality associated with the New York law that it is made of different rules in international arbitration, made it a less attractive jurisdiction for international arbitration. The law applies to proceeding on or after the effective date. The initiation of the proceeding should take place within 30 days after the relief is granted because, after that time, the order granting preliminary relief would become null and void.

The article analyzes the decision in the case Global Gold Mining versus Peter M. Robinson et al. issued by the Southern District of New York federal court in 2008, in which a party sought to compel the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC Court) to reverse its preliminary determination on jurisdiction with respect to a non-signatory to an arbitration agreement under 6(2) of the ICC Rules. The effects of the Global Gold decision on jurisdiction by arbitral institutions are explained.

The article offers information on New York's Libel Terrorism Protection Act and the contradictory defamation laws in the U.S. and England. Libel tourism or terrorism describes the situations where plaintiffs who believe they have been defamed go forum shopping for the court of a country which is more likely to allow their claims and award them high and dissuasive damages, irrespective of the tenuous nexus between the forum and the substance of the dispute. It is stated that plaintiffs often look for jurisdictions where defamation laws are favorable to their cases. English laws are particularly attractive in this regard. However, the U.S., on the other hand, has protected libel defendants based on the rights afforded under the First Amendment of the Constitution.

The article focuses on the choice between arbitration and litigation regarding disputes. It is stated that arbitration is better for subcontractors and litigation is better for contractors. One should arbitrate when his case is strong on the facts, but weak on the law. In this case two cases are being discussed. One case is from New Jersey, regarding a dispute related to faults in designing of plant and the payment due, between the contractor and the owner of the firm. Another case is from New York State, regarding a dispute related to wrongful termination of contract from the owner's side resulting in a loss to the contractor. The contract in this case was not containing an arbitration clause, so it was headed to state court. Both the cases are different in their controversial amounts. The New Jersey case started with a simple demand for arbitration. while the New York case the litigation had a more tortuous beginning. The proceedings related to the cases continued for a couple of years.

This article describes a lawsuit that created a right to discharge planning for people with psychiatric disabilities leaving New York City jails. The article, written by one of the attorneys representing the plaintiff class, describes Brad H. v. City of New York, uses affidavits and records gathered during the litigation to highlight essential components of mental health discharge planning in jails and prisons, and argues that a so-called transinstitutionalization of the rights of incarcerated people with psychiatric disabilities through litigation may be one strategy for reducing criminalization of mental illness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outlines the circumstances surrounding a murder trial of Daniel McFarland in New York City, highlighting the testimony of William A. Hammond, a neurologist and former Surgeon General of the U.S. Army, for McFarland. Background of the murder trial; Hammond's physical examination proving that McFarland has suffered from cerebral congestion; Tests performed using dynamograph to support the evidence.

The article discusses the failure of Charles Silver to provide a convincing account of the judges dispute in the 1889 New York Court of Appeals case, Riggs v. Palmer and evaluates Silver's defense of legal positivism against Ronald Dworkin. It cites Silver's view that Dworkin is wrong in contending that the dispute on the case focused on the meaning of the status of wills and that the issue was whether equitable principles can temper the application of the statute of wills. It takes a look at the written judgments of Judges Earl and Gray of the New York Court of Appeal to settle the disagreement between Dworkin and Silver. It confirms the force of Dworkin's criticisms of legal positivism.

Focuses on 'Whiting v. Dow Chemical Co.,' a case dealing with stock ownership in New York. Provisions of the Securities Act of 1934; United States Securities and Exchange Commission's interpretation of 'beneficial ownership'; Definition of corporate control.

The article presents updates on issues related to education in New York City. A lawsuit regarding teachers salary was filed by Leo Bamberger, member of the Brooklyn board, against the city. Charles J. Jennings was appointed president of the Queens Borough Teachers' Association. A paper on "School Inspection" was read by associate superintendent W. W. Edson before the Educational Council.